Search and Filter

Repository Feedback

Your feedback helps us improve the repository's content relevance and usability. Please share your thoughts to help us better serve researchers and practitioners.

Submit feedback

Submit a research study

Contribute to the repository:

Add a paper

Homogenizing effect of large language models (LLMs) on creative diversity: An empirical comparison of human and ChatGPT writing

Date
Publisher
Computers in Human Behavior: Artifical Humans
Generative AI systems, especially Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, have recently emerged as significant contributors to creative processes. While LLMs can produce creative content that might be as good as or even better than human-created content, their widespread use risks reducing creative diversity across groups of people. In the present research, we aimed to quantify this homogenizing effect of LLMs on creative diversity, not only at the individual level but also at the collective level. Across three preregistered studies, we analyzed 2,200 college admissions essays. Using a novel measure—the diversity growth rate—we showed that each additional human-written essay contributed more new ideas than did each additional GPT-4 essay. Notably, this difference became more pronounced as more essays were included in the analysis and persisted despite efforts to enhance AI-generated content through both prompt and parameter modifications. Overall, our findings suggest that, despite their potential to enhance individual creativity, the widespread use of LLMs could diminish the collective diversity of creative ideas.
Study at a glance
  • Question: Does using large language models reduce the diversity of creative ideas at the collective level compared to human writing?
  • Setting and data: 2,200 college admissions essays, setting and dates not stated in the abstract.
  • Method: Comparative text analysis of human and AI writing across three preregistered studies.
Why it matters

Although large language models can generate high-quality creative content, their widespread use risks reducing creative diversity across groups of people.

Key findings
  • Each additional human-written essay contributed more new ideas than each additional GPT-4-written essay.
  • The gap in new idea contributions between human and AI writing widened as more essays were included in the analysis.
  • Efforts to enhance AI content through prompt and parameter adjustments failed to eliminate the gap in idea diversity.

Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.

What is the application?
Who is the user?